Recommendations for useful serum testing with suspected multiple sclerosis

Laboratory evaluation for the differential diagnosis of possible multiple sclerosis in the United States: A physician survey

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence and lack of guidelines for diagnostic laboratory evaluation of patients with possible multiple sclerosis (MS).

OBJECTIVE

To survey neurologists on their practice of laboratory testing in patients with possible MS.

METHODS

An online survey was developed to query the frequency of serum and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) studies ordered in the routine evaluation of patients with possible MS, and in three hypothetical clinical cases. Non-MS specialist neurologists who evaluate patients for MS in their practice were invited to participate by MedSurvey (a medical market research company).

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 190 neurologists. A mean of 17.2 (SD: 17.0) tests in serum and CSF were reported "always" ordered in the evaluation of patients with possible MS. CSF oligoclonal bands was the most frequently selected ("always" among 73.7% of participants). Antinuclear antibody (43.2%), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (34.2%), and thyroid stimulating hormone (31.6%) were also among the most frequently ordered.

DISCUSSION

Extensive laboratory evaluations are often completed in the evaluation of possible MS. However, many of these tests have poor specificity and false positive results could yield unnecessary increased costs, diagnostic delay, and potentially misdiagnosis. Further research is needed to identify optimal laboratory approaches for possible MS.

Differential diagnosis of suspected multiple sclerosis: an updated consensus approach

Accurate diagnosis of multiple sclerosis requires careful attention to its differential diagnosis-many disorders can mimic the clinical manifestations and paraclinical findings of this disease. A collaborative effort, organised by The International Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials in Multiple Sclerosis in 2008, provided diagnostic approaches to multiple sclerosis and identified clinical and paraclinical findings (so-called red flags) suggestive of alternative diagnoses. Since then, knowledge of disorders in the differential diagnosis of multiple sclerosis has expanded substantially. For example, CNS inflammatory disorders that present with syndromes overlapping with multiple sclerosis can increasingly be distinguished from multiple sclerosis with the aid of specific clinical, MRI, and laboratory findings; studies of people misdiagnosed with multiple sclerosis have also provided insights into clinical presentations for which extra caution is warranted. Considering these data, an update to the recommended diagnostic approaches to common clinical presentations and key clinical and paraclinical red flags is warranted to inform the contemporary clinical evaluation of patients with suspected multiple sclerosis.

Limited diagnostic utility of serologic testing for neurologic manifestations of systemic disease in the evaluation of suspected multiple sclerosis: A single-center observational study

BACKGROUND

The clinical evaluation of a new diagnosis of MS typically includes serologic testing to evaluate for its many mimics, yet there is little data to guide approaches to such testing.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate for the frequency and clinical significance of serologic testing for MS diagnostic evaluations.

METHODS

In a single MS subspeciality center retrospective study, new patient evaluations for MS over the course of a year were identified, and the results of serologic testing and diagnostic evaluation extracted. Retrospective longitudinal diagnostic assessment was performed to confirm the accuracy of initial serological testing assessments.

RESULTS

150 patients had 823 serologic tests. 40 (5%) tests were positive, and resulted in 117 additional serologic tests, 10 radiographs, and 2 biopsies. 77 (51%) patients were diagnosed with a non-demyelinating disorder. Serologic testing results did not change any diagnosis, yet in some patients, it resulted in unnecessary additional testing and diagnostic delay.

CONCLUSIONS

Serologic testing in the clinical assessment for routine MS resulted in unnecessary diagnostic delay, additional testing, and considerable healthcare cost.

Is the Choosing Wisely® campaign model applicable to the management of multiple sclerosis in France? A GRESEP pilot study

BACKGROUND

Launched in the US in 2012, Choosing Wisely^® is a campaign promoted by the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) Foundation with the goal of improving healthcare effectiveness by avoiding wasteful or unnecessary medical tests, treatments and procedures. It uses concise recommendations produced by national medical societies to start discussions between physicians and patients on the relevance of these services as part of a shared decision-making process. The Multiple Sclerosis Focus Group (Groupe de Reflexion Autour de la Sclérose en Plaques; GRESEP) undertook a pilot study to assess the relevance and feasibility of this approach in the management of multiple sclerosis (MS) in France.

METHODS

Recommendations were developed using the formal consensus method from the guidelines of the French National Health Authority (HAS). A steering committee selected the themes and drafted concise evidence reviews. An independent rating group then assessed these recommendations for clarity, relevance and feasibility.

RESULTS

Seven recommendations were accepted: (1) avoid systematic ordering of multimodal evoked potential studies for diagnosing MS; (2) do not treat MS relapses with low-dose oral corticosteroids; (3) when treating MS relapse with high-dose corticosteroids, the systematic use of the intravenous route is unnecessary if the oral route can be used; (4) systematic hospitalization is not necessary for treating MS relapse with high-dose corticosteroid therapy, particularly if the oral route is used, except for the first treated relapse and the presence of exclusion or non-eligibility criteria; (5) in the absence of clinical signs or symptoms of urinary infection, avoid systematic screening with urine microscopy and culture before the administration of corticosteroid therapy for MS relapse in patients using intermittent self-catheterization; (6) avoid antibiotic treatment of clinically asymptomatic MS patients using intermittent self-catheterization, even if urine microscopy and culture reveal the presence of microorganisms; and (7) avoid introducing symptomatic drug treatment for MS-related fatigue.

CONCLUSION

This pilot study, the first of its kind in France, has demonstrated the relevance and feasibility of adapting the Choosing Wisely^® model to MS by practitioners specializing in the disorder. However, the acceptability of these recommendations by other practitioners in other specialist fields as well as their impact on everyday clinical practices now need to be studied.

Targeted clinical audits immediately following the establishment of clinical practice guidelines for multiple sclerosis in 17 neurology departments: A pragmatic and collaborative study

Following the publication practice guidelines for multiple sclerosis by a group of neurologists (multiple sclerosis study group [GRESEP]), the primary objective of this study was to compare the reality of practice to the guidelines according to the targeted clinical audit (TCA) method. The study was conducted at 17 neurology sites and was administered during two periods of MS care (diagnostic - TCA-DIAG, and disease course - TCA-EVOL). Two complementary surveys were done on the record keeping and the root causes of the deviations. The percentages of compliance ranged from 8 to 98% for the TCA-DIAG, and from 15 to 99% for the TCA-EVOL, with wide disparity between sites. The audits were able to identify causes of the flaws in traceability or accessibility. At the end of the study, despite its limitations, we think that the sharing of the results from different sites provided interesting approaches for the use of the assessment criteria defined by GRESEP in a complete audit cycle. This study is to our knowledge the first report of an experiment in which guidelines were created, and subsequently followed by the development of assessment criteria and then the performance of targeted clinical audits using them, all by the same participants.

CONTEXT

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are intended to help practitioners and patients make informed treatment choices, but their integration into actual practice remains problematic. This study was done immediately following the publication of CPGs for multiple sclerosis (MS) by the multiple sclerosis study group [GRESEP]. The primary objective was to generate quality criteria, to test them within the same group, and to analyze the observed deviations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was conducted in the 17 voluntary departments that had participated in the development of the CPGs. The targeted clinical audit method was administered during two periods of MS care (diagnostic - TCA-DIAG, and disease course - TCA-EVOL). All the files were evaluated by a clinical research technician using digital format, which ensured thoroughness of the collection. Two complementary surveys were done on the record keeping and the potential causes of the deviations.

RESULTS

The percentages of compliance to the criteria ranged from 8 to 98% (out of 240 files) for the TCA-DIAG, and from 15 to 99% (221 files) for the TCA-EVOL, with wide disparity between sites (interquartile distance ranges: TCA-DIAG between 0% and 55%; TCA-EVOL between 0% and 70%). The mean percentage of compliance with all the criteria as measured by the TCA-DIAG was 83.9% for the sites with digital files vs. 76.4% for those with only paper files (P<0.01). For the TCA-EVOL, the difference was not significant. Explanations for the observed deviations were suggested (1 to 9 according to the participants).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The quantified results could not be compared to other studies given the unique nature of the experiment. The importance of the traceability of practices in the patient files was discussed and assessed with regard to continuity and safety of care, as well as the medical-legal perspectives. Causes of lack of compliance were suggested (particularly the absence of reminders, the lack of means and/or time). Despite the limitations of the study, we think it is advisable that when a group becomes involved in the development of CPGs that they follow with the development of assessment criteria in order to evaluate the validity as well as their character as intermediate indicators of the quality of practices.

Multiple sclerosis and pregnancy

The question of pregnancy in patients with multiple sclerosis is regularly raised due to the prevalence of the disease in middle age women. The multiple sclerosis think tank (Groupe de Réflexion sur la Sclérose en Plaques [GRESEP]) decided to develop recommendations on this issue, with consideration to both the impact of multiple sclerosis on pregnancy, and that of pregnancy on the disease. As with topics of previous works, the formal expert consensus method was used. The working group was composed of hospital-based and private practice neurologists. The reading group was composed of neurologists, anaesthetists and obstetricians. Each recommendation is presented with the relevant level of consensus.